Re: ITP: gettext-base
> Santiago Vila wrote:
> >
> > Ok, I've done the math: A "gettext-base" package containing the
> > /usr/bin/gettext binary, all the message catalogs, and just the required
> > bits at /usr/doc/gettext-base has an approximate size of just 70K
> > (compressed). This is considerably smaller than the 340K (compressed) of
> > gettext in slink, so it may worth the effort to do the split.
Santiago:
It might possibly have been courteous to acknowledge that I had done
the maths in multiple ways on this one and posted the results here
already....
> > So, if there are not objections, sections and priorities will be like
> > this:
> >
> > gettext-base base standard
> > gettext devel optional
No objections from me. Sounds fine. As a harder project (of whose
worth I am uncertain): figure out how much more space could be saved
by splitting the catalogs as well.
> > I would like some policy saying that packages should not Depend or
> > Recommend gettext-base but instead check for /usr/bin/gettext and use
> > "echo" if it does not exist. I don't want people to lose the freedom to
> > uninstall gettext or gettext-base if these packages are not needed in
> > the system. Maybe I'll make a proposal for this in debian-policy.
>
> shouldn't "gettext" contain the binary, and "gettext-dev" contain the
> development stuff for it?
Jeff:
Perhaps. But Santiago has, on previous occasions on this list, given
good reasons for not calling it gettext-dev. Besides, as long as the
description of the package is clear, there shouldn't be much of a
problem.
Julian
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, QMW, Univ. of London. J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk
Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://www.debian.org/~jdg
Reply to: